A Modern Take on Modern War.

2010.02.08

Two Small Things

Two news stories piqued my interest today. This one on the latest ISAF offensive in Afghanistan. And this on Iran's nuclear programme.

To address the Afghan story first, two things strike me. Firstly, it seems that Operation Moshtarak, a huge offensive to forcibly remove the Taliban from Helmand province, is counter to what NATO is working towards in Afghanistan. Stability in Afghanistan will come from breaking the cycles of corruption and handing security of the country over to a competent indigenous Afghan police force and army.

Now, according to The Telegraph, moshtarak is the Dari word for 'together'. This makes sense because NATO's mission in Afghanistan is to train and prepare the Afghan National Army (ANA) and the Afghan National Police (ANP), but it seems to me that a massed infantry assault is not likely to achieve the result of winning the favour of the locals. This especially in view of what Hamid Karzai has demanded recently. Not to mention frequently throughout his presidency.

One encouraging thing to come out of the whole affair though: the realistic stance taken by the British defence community. For so long, they have pretended to the people that this war would be winnable without any kind of casualties. For too long, we have been asked to be surprised that soldiers die in battle. But today, Bob Ainsworth issued this remark:

“We shouldn't deny or pretend to people that casualties are not a very real risk on these kind of operations and people have to be prepared for that.
This is not a safe environment and it doesn't matter how much kit and equipment we provide for them, we cannot entirely make these operations risk-free.”

This is refreshing honesty about the situation. Perhaps some more of this, and the pacificistic cries of “End the War, Bring the Troops Home!” ignoring the responsibility NATO and the US created for itself in invading Afghanistan and ousting the Taliban in the first place, will be out-weighed by the sense and the reasoned argument of people like Stephen Biddle in The American Interest, last July might cut through and demonstrate that Afghanistan is ‘winnable’, whatever that means. (Perhaps that will be the subject of another post.)

To move on to the second news article I am interested in. Iran’s decision to begin enriching uranium for medical research purposes.
I am writing an essay on US nuclear policy since the end of the Cold War.

This story is interesting to me in this context, because it feels like a mini-Cold War is being played out in the Middle East. With Israel playing the capable military superpower (read the US) and Iran the embattled also ran (read the Soviet Union).
Iran, according to Ahmadinejad, is enriching uranium for medical testing purposes. Unfortunately, as the modern world remains tied by the apron strings to the safety of the Cold War, Western governments are refusing to believe reports from Tehran. This is saddening, as it is increasing the tensions between Iran and Israel needlessly. It is also depressingly similar to the Cold War and tensions between the US and USSR.

I wonder if the world will shake off the overcoat of Cold War stability and embrace Samuel Huntington’s idea of a uni-multipolar world.